Macbook Pro not "pro" anymore?

there may be something in this forum already, but I have been looking at the Apple store making up configurations of the new MBP's and I have to say I'm disgusted that they call these machines pro anymore! For example:

- hard drive speeds - why is 7200rpm not standard?
- why does a pro not have the fastest processor standard?
- why is the screen resolution so low?
- why do they make you pay extra for an adapter and a remote? For $3K for a laptop, just throw them in!

The MacBook is so close in specs - if I didn't rely on mac apps I would seriously consider using a windoze laptop! And I love apple!

I just feel that they have muddied the lines and forgotten about real pro users in the last update.

Sheesh, I'm sorry for saying anything. Everyone just wants to jump down your throat as soon as you post anything!

I know it's an issue that has been going on for a long time - I just thought that after all this time, all this technology and resources needed by pros for what they do that there would be a big difference in the MB and MBP lineups, or at least there would be less BTO stuff on the Pro machines, as they would put top of the line components in them.

I'd still like to get one though! Maybe after the next revision, I have to find a way to get rid of this 2 month old whitebook.

I have got to agree, although I am fairly happy with my new MBP I am not totally satisfied with the machine. As a photographer, I usually shoot tethered to the computer in studio or on location. If I wanted to use adapters, add ons or expansion cards to use my computer I'd buy a PC.

there may be something in this forum already, but I have been looking at the Apple store making up configurations of the new MBP's and I have to say I'm disgusted that they call these machines pro anymore! For example:
- hard drive speeds - why is 7200rpm not standard?
- why does a pro not have the fastest processor standard?

Click to expand...

These are upgrade options, so what's the gripe? Are you saying that there should exactly one MacBook Pro configuration: a 17" laptop maxed out, for $4500?

Sheesh, I'm sorry for saying anything. Everyone just wants to jump down your throat as soon as you post anything!

Click to expand...

Well, the title of the thread is a loaded question, hence you're going to get an equal pushback.

What is a pro anyhow? Is a pro someone with better tools?

"Pro" is really nothing more than a marketing term and a way to seperate two product lines, that in the recent revision are merging more and more. Maybe because Apple actually is asking themselves the same questions, what makes a person a "pro" and not a "consumer".

It's about hardware specs in the end, and not all "pro" users can afford the high end "top of the line everything" laptop that you susgested the MBP should be.

I don't think FireWire equals Pro, nor ExpressCard equals Pro, but once you make all other things nearly equal, how do you seperate your product lines? Those few little details make sense to me.

And all of this, from a 12" PowerBook, new 2.8 MBP owner and a Mac Pro. So I own three "pro" line computers, but I don't do any money generating tasks on these machines.... So am I a pro because I own computers with the name, or because I needed the specs and those computers meet exactly my needs?

The biggest difference between the MacBook Pros and the MacBooks has always been (and still is) the dedicated graphics card, higher screen resolution, better screen and slightly more expandability in the form of an express card slot.

i am so tired of hearing this conversation as well but there are many legitimate complaints.

The thing that apple needs to remember is to professionals, these machines are not toys, they are tools. They have been the benchmark for professionals in the design field for years and will have to continue to provide to that market before it shifts to another manufacturer. Apple is extremely fortunate that their customer service has created customer loyalty; customers are coming back when they should be purchasing from a manufacturer that provides more features for a lower price.

Adobe does not ride on their name, they are constantly developing new components and features to their software that keep the professionals coming back. Adobe Photoshop is the gold standard in photo editing (IMO) because it is the best, not because it is Adobe. Apple has been the gold standard because they have had some of the best machines, is this still true? Or are they better because they are Apple?

there may be something in this forum already, but I have been looking at the Apple store making up configurations of the new MBP's and I have to say I'm disgusted that they call these machines pro anymore! For example:

- hard drive speeds - why is 7200rpm not standard?
- why does a pro not have the fastest processor standard?
- why is the screen resolution so low?
- why do they make you pay extra for an adapter and a remote? For $3K for a laptop, just throw them in!

The MacBook is so close in specs - if I didn't rely on mac apps I would seriously consider using a windoze laptop! And I love apple!

I just feel that they have muddied the lines and forgotten about real pro users in the last update.

Click to expand...

I got an answer for you...

If your not entirely happy with the new, get the old. Or if Apple doesn't satisfy your requirements, ditch them and get yourself a Ferrari red windoze box, upgrade to the stick-on yellow go fast strips; so when Bill Gates crashes you can blame the stickers for being yellow! But for crying out loud, do it quietly and quit whining.

If your not entirely happy with the new, get the old. Or if Apple doesn't satisfy your requirements, ditch them and get yourself a Ferrari red windoze box, upgrade to the stick-on yellow go fast strips; so when Bill Gates crashes you can blame the stickers for being yellow! But for crying out loud, do it quietly and quit whining.

Jesus, you sound like a five year old spoilt brat.

Click to expand...

My goodness what a response. Do you have an idea what you sound like?

I can see why I would sound like a whiner, but I'm not really. But now that I've read through a lot of these responses, I can see where I have made an error because of the way Apple just use the Pro name to separate it from the MacBook, not name it that way because it's a total and utter 'pro' machine.

I saw the new machines in store yesterday - they look amazing! I hope that 8gb of Ram story is true!

Imagine all the whining if Apple just dropped the "Pro" part of the name... now that would be really funny to watch... All you cool people with your new glossy/glassy chicklet keyboard toys would scream bloody murder. I can just hear it now... "Waah, waah... we wanna be pros, and now mean old Steve just took that away from us... We want our "Pro" name back."

I'd actually love to see that. What's the point in the name anyway. I don't give a rat's a$$ about the "Pro" tag on my MBP, as long as it does what I want it to do, and I'm comfortable using it. I don't give a ***** if it gets scratched or shows a bit of wear. It earns it's keep. It's all about whether the tool works for you. That's why I don't like glossy and chicklets and the downgrade in ports. I don't like the new "ugly" two-tone look, but I could actually live with that because it's all about functional style, not fashionable style to me. Most of the new changes don't improve my life as a person who works with his computer, so I don't find them valuable. It's really simple, and I don't quite understand how so many of you fans of the new "look" get so damn defensive over the whole issue of some of us not liking your new object of desire. Get over it. Like I said, drop the "Pro" badge from your new toy, and you'd whine, whine, whine... you know it's true.

Anyway, to Apple, Pro is strictly constrained to creative professionals, nothing more or less. I argue this, considering their pro page. Everything else (read gaming) is on a "you get what we will give you" basis.

Honestly, what makes this MacBook Pro any less pro than the last?? The last one didn't come with the fastest processor speeds by default, its always been an option. The last one didn't come with 7200rpm drives by default. The screen res has been the same. The biggest difference with these new machines is that its a massive cosmetic overhaul. They're not particularly faster than the last ones but they look significantly different. There's new hardware in there sure but in the grand scheme of things, the hardware performance apart from the graphics card is pretty much the same as the last one. So the screen's glossy. How does that make it less pro, better colour reproduction's a bad thing for pro users is it? I've been using a MacBook for a while now and the glossy screen has never bothered me. When I first got it, I compared it to my old iBook for outside use and I found that while there were more reflections, the iBook was harder to read since the sun's light was shared out all over the screen making all of it unreadable as opposed to a small section mirroring the sun on the MacBook.

I fail to understand why some of you think this laptop is less 'pro' than the last one. So some more technology has been passed down to the MacBook range. That's always been the case. The main difference here is that its happened at the same time. In the past MacBook Pros have been updated then MacBooks have been given the same updated chipset a month or so later.

Honestly, I think the biggest thing here that's upsetting people is the fact that the MacBooks now have the same design as the MacBook Pro and people might (shock horror) think you 'only' have a MacBook when they see you sitting in Starbucks with your MacBook Pro.

Honestly, I think the biggest thing here that's upsetting people is the fact that the MacBooks now have the same design as the MacBook Pro and people might (shock horror) think you 'only' have a MacBook when they see you sitting in Starbucks with your MacBook Pro.

Click to expand...

True, and with that glossed out screen you'll be able to glare right back at them

But I think thats the point...

That this is a 2008 revision of Apple Flagship machine hovering around $2500, and it doesn't even come with a display adapter?

I won't rag on just Apple for this, but in a time of quick SSD being available, shouldn't 7200 be standard at some point? Expandability (in the form of additional ports), top of the line (read:beefy) components, standard? (maxed out CPU, maxed out ram etc) 2 GB's standard? Please, I can munch through that by opening up a few word docs and firefox.

Out of the box, nah. This machine ain't Pro. Not by today's measurements. The MBP was the cream of the crop when it debuted, along with the powerbook. This one is just meh for me.

True, and with that glossed out screen you'll be able to glare right back at them

But I think thats the point...

That this is a 2008 revision of Apple Flagship machine hovering around $2500, and it doesn't even come with a display adapter?

I won't rag on just Apple for this, but in a time of quick SSD being available, shouldn't 7200 be standard at some point? Expandability (in the form of additional ports), top of the line (read:beefy) components, standard? (maxed out CPU, maxed out ram etc) 2 GB's standard? Please, I can munch through that by opening up a few word docs and firefox.

Out of the box, nah. This machine ain't Pro. Not by today's measurements. The MBP was the cream of the crop when it debuted, along with the powerbook. This one is just meh for me.

Click to expand...

I think the 2GB of RAM is darned impressive for Apple. Maybe some of you are newer converts to Apple but back in the day Apple was stingy as hell when it came to RAM. Having 2GB standard also has a few other benefits. It makes more of a difference between the 2.4 GHz model and the 2.53 GHz model for one. Secondly, this RAM is *expensive*. I could have upgraded a previous MBP to 4GB for less than £40 after market. To do that with one of these costs about £100. DDR3 is seriously expensive compared to DDR2 (which is what nearly all the competitors with 4GB standard will have).
Should 7200 rpm be standard? Maybe. It wasn't on the previous model though and that model's hardly old. I'm sure they'll make it standard in the minor update that'll probably happen before Nehalem comes next year.

Apple's just spent a fortune creating a whole new look. That's what you're paying for, the aesthetical quality which I don't think any other manufacturer can match. They're going to want to make a healthy profit first to recoup some of that and they also want to leave some room for improvement come the next minor update. The quality of these casings is meant to be truly fantastic, vastly superior to anything anyone else is making right now. This brings me back to my point, I think the MacBook now looks a lot better built and looks a lot more pro, which is what is truly upsetting the pro owners who always liked to show off their aluminium to lowly plastic laptop owners.

The only thing that I think Apple has done horribly wrong here is the lack of adapters in the box for VGA, DVI and Dual-DVI. That frankly, is an insult. However, I wouldn't say that it makes the MacBook Pro any less 'pro'. It makes Apple look a lot more greedy though. Particularly when the DVI adapters can't support VGA pass through even though its part of the DVI standard. If they're desperate to sell the adapters separately in order to save costs then there should only be one adapter at about £20 and it should be a full DVI-DL standard adapter with Dual-DVI *and* VGA output. £40 tops. Not £69 for Dual DVI and an extra £20 for VGA.

MacRumors attracts a broad audience
of both consumers and professionals interested in
the latest technologies and products. We also boast an active community focused on
purchasing decisions and technical aspects of the iPhone, iPod, iPad, and Mac platforms.